WHO KILLED KITCHENER?

Lord Alfred Douglas Committed For Trial ALLEGED CRIMINAL LIBEL AGAINST WINSTON CHURCHILL. Amazing Allegations. x A recent cable indicates that a criminal libel trial of more than usual interest will be taking place shortly m London, as Lord Alfred Douglas has been committed for trial on a charge of criminally libelling Mr. Winston Churchill m a pamphlet entitled, "The Murder of Kitchener, and the Truth about the Battle of • Jutland and the Jews." The proceedings are no doubt the outcome of Lord Alfred's libel action, against the London "Morning Post" some months ago, when he was awarded a farthing damages for that journal publishing a letter from the editor of the "Jewish Guardian" accusing Douglas of "making it a paying proposition to invent vile insults against the Jews." It appears that Lord Alfred Douglas was editor of the publication "Plain English" during: the years 1920 and 1921, and the comments complained of m the "Morning Post" were connected with the loss of Lord Kitchener on the Hampshire, the official reports circulated about the Battle of Jutland, and the failure of the fleet of destroyers at Harwich to put to sea during- the engagement and clean up "the crippled German Grand Fleet before they dispersed m the darkness. . Very little comment appeared on Lord Alfred's libel action, and only vefy meajjre reports are to be found m the London Press. This Lord Alfred claims to be due to the monopolistic nature of the Press there now. He suggests that his statements have been suppressed by mutual agreement between the various dally newspapers; This concealment Douglas has apparently now overcome by publishing his charges m pamphlet form, and some sensational revelations are certain if he can get Churchill, Lord Balfour. and others m the witness-box -for examination. Meantime Lord Alfred Is out on £200 bail, aria apart from the natural world interest m his allegutions they are of special concern to New Zealand when Lord Jellicoe figures so prominently m them. From a full report of Lord Alfred Douglas's disclosures given to a public meeting m London, convened by the "Kitchener and Jutland Publicity Committee." it would seem that the most serious charges brought by Douglas concern the sinking- of the Hampshire, and the Jutland battle. According to Douglas the sinking of Kitchener's ship was due to an internal explosion, and the British Minister for War, with his staff, was murdered by Bolshevik Jews who wished to nip m the bud his mission to Russia which would have checkmated any there except on constitutional and pro-Ally line?. Douglas wrote m "plain English" that the Hampshire was lying m Scapa when Kitchener joined her accompanied by picked men who combined the finest brains that Britain could produce, and they were . experts m transport, cojnmissariat, finance, and general business organisation. The Hampshire left Scapa Flow m a westerly gale escorted by two destroyers. Before she had gone a few miles the destroyers were recalled, the Hampshire skirted the Orkney coast and blew up m the plain sight of numerous witnesses on the shore; the wreck floated for some considerable time after. Lord Alfred Douglas alleges that after leaving for London the Hampshire survivors have disappeared from human ken from that day to this: "Not a trace or sign of them has been heard of since," alleges the author of the charges, and he states he cannot find out "whether they were murdered, or whether they were merely bribed or terrorised and deported." The Hampshire still lies less than two miles from the shore m about 20 fathoms, where divers could report whether the explosion was internal or from outside. Lord Alfred declares that German records prove no submarine or minelayer had been near the place at any time, and alleges that a time bomb was set In the 111-fated cruiser by Bolshevik Jew agents who were m full touch with Kitchener's movements. In regard to the Battle of Jutland, over, three years ago m "Plain. English" Lord Alfred wrote that Winston Churchill had received from Sir Ernest Cassel a large sum of money to issue what was afterwards declared to be a false and faked account of the fight, largely m. favor of Germany, and which caused violent fluctuations op the American .Stock Exchange, enabling the international financiers knowing the true result to make a tremendous coup on the changes m the market. Questions were asked m Parliament but neither (he Government nor Mr. Churchill made any move, nor did the Grown Law officers take action. But now, after a lupse of well over three yeara, Mr. Winston Churchill has evidently been stung by the new Douglas pamphlet into putting the author (n the dock on a charge of criminal libel. Lord Alfred has a very poor opinion of his "poor frightened rabbit of counsel" (as he describes him) — Mr. Comyns Carr. Mr. Churchill' went into the witness-box In the cose of Douglas v. "Morning Posf only on assurance he would not be cross-examined, and Lord Alfred accuses his counsel of "the most gross treachery," influenced, he alleges, by the fact that Comyns Carr was a cousin ot Patrick Hastings, K.C., who appeared for the defendant newspaper. Lord Balfour as First Lord of the Admiralty, was tofe ill to appear, and when Douglas learned that Balfour had beoi\ cross-examined on "Commission." the report of which covered fourteen pages of foolscap, but was not allowed to bo read m Court, he rose and made a protest to the Judge and walked out of the building, surprised to learn later that he had got the verdict and a farthing damages. In Lord Alfred's opinion Carr, his counsel, had played him "a roenn. cownrdly. and dirty trick'" In his evidence taken on commission Lord Balfour swore that the first report of the Jutland action was drafted by him and not Churchill, and Sir Masterton Smith had kept the original tin an "interesting relic." Douglas retorts that Masterton Smith left the Admiralty to Join Churchill m the Colonial Office ns permanent secretary, and In conjunction with a subordinate? called Ezekiel <?ave a concession of all tho water-power In Palestine to a Bolshevik Jew called Ruthekberg. which wan exposed m Parliament and donounced by Sir W. Joynson Hicks: Lord Alfred would not believe Masterton Smith on oath, but points out that when Half our whs asked untlor ci'oh.soxamlnatlon whether Jo.lllcoo had not complained that the first Jutland report issued by the Admiralty "were unduly pessimistic and unfair to him." Balfour replied: "I was not aware of that. It was v very erroneous view and It Is THE FIRST I HAVE HEARD OF IT." Hero 1b Jclllcoe'rt protest aH telegraphed oflktally to the Admiralty: "Submit communications to; Press re enemy's casual tie* and om* own. u»d general history of action mny bo amended to nicrct* with my re.portn of the action. Last night's communique magnifies ours and minimises enemy's entuinltle.s. and, Klves somewhat falno Impression of action Kcnornlly." Balfour declined to answer n. question n& to why the tied of Harwich destroyers was not went to settle the Germans, but Sir Percy Scott lmtf no hrxltatlon and ninU'tl m tlu» London "Time*" tluH: "At the Until** of Jutlnml when the German tt«'i«t v,a« domurolltfed. n cloud of those (tfostroyrrn) ntart«»<l out from Unrwlrh to ndinlnlxtor the 'coup-do* jrraiv. I .' but. unfortunate? 1 )', the Admiralty had a wlrote.** and recalled lliom:

POtnobody cammltti'd n terrible crime, nml HIM n.ini«> wan not .l«*lilroo!" l^orti A)frc«l DouKlau ii<'rlineJ to be jittillftd oIT l>y ..J'inlfour 1 * lrtps« of iromory. or !«n>* "pJHclal 1I«>* nn«l «<V!t»(onii." nnd . n^if'-d v:n» thin crime "merely ltHT«<lU>t«? ifoilv, Wlor*y nnfl Jncomr)Ot'p»ctf. Mr w« v r»* ih^ro ev<«» tlnrJwr r«tHon«?" Hl« t tin I should certainty cr«*:ito more than usual intermit. » i